No one wants to not talk about the trouble and misery men face in the society as a collective. The problem is that why is this a counter argument to the miseries and oppression women are subjected to. What kind of 1-up the other game is this. Both topics are equally important but not a counter argument to each other ffs
I agree. As people we're sometimes eager to compare one type of pain to another, which is completely irrational. Its something that the took me a long time to fully understand because I've seen people in my family who had it worse off than me and I grew up telling myself to "toughen up", which led me to all kinds of unhealthy thoughts in my life. Its this type of comparative pain that causes the problem. A person who lost their arm can't tell someone who lost their hand that their pain is any less valid.
I think it's important to recognize that the issues men face in society stem come from the same problems/prejudices that women face. The stereotypes that say men that they can't show emotion and say that women are always overemotional and that it's *supposed* to be that way are harmful to BOTH genders. Fighting against these ideas benefits both genders.
Yeah... she doesn’t want to debate him for a reason. It wouldn’t be a debate- you’d need to pick through the factual inaccuracies of his statements, then the logical faults, and in the end you aren’t debating the subject but how nonsensical his argument is. In fact- I’m bored. So I’m going to go do that last part in another post.
Don't worry, he didn't. He came at her with statistical inaccuracies and a lack of context, thereby misrepresenting many of the issues at hand. He has a point that men suffer as well, but his representation of said issue is not correct
6
deleted
· 5 years ago
Not to mention he was the Instigator of the conversation, prepping some numbers in advance so he could catch her off guard. He built up the conversation in that way so she wouldn’t have anything to say back to his not-even-well-constructed argument. HE then posted this as if she represent the entire world population that disagrees with this limited mindset so he could spread the message that these “feminists” don’t know what they’re talking about and therefore invalidate the very real gender related issues women face. She responded as well as she could in this situation and now her words are being used like this. She might even understand that gender roles are a nuanced subject that harms both genders and can help as well but through these memes we never give these subjects the amount of thought they deserve, creating a dysfunctional black and white worldview.
I am very bitter right now so sorry if I sound agressive.
This is a stupid argument. Let’s look at the logic. Most murder victims are male... most prisoners are male... most murderers are..... male. And then they go to jail- so those 3 knock themselves out when we remember the person performing the action is male. It isn’t a privilege to say that men prefer to victimize other men- and when men are doing the victimizing.... which regardless... most prison guards are... male. So the mostly male murderers kill mostly men and then are put in jail by a mostly male prison and justice system, and this is female privilege how exactly?
Then mostly male politicians start conflicts with a mostly male military who mostly male politicians and military brass fought to keep women from joining- and just recently gave women the privilege to fight and die along side those men? Let that sink in. The argument is that women have the privilege of not dying in combat, but women have been fighting for the privilege to serve and fight and die alongside men for decades or even centuries. So when more men die because men forbid women to fight- is that a privilege or an example of male oppression?
What’s more- classified leaks through wiki leaks break down 66,081 civilian deaths explicitly classified as such with over 100,000 “mixed” collateral fatalities in the Iraq war. About 4500 US soldiers died and about 30,000 wounded. Best estimates put Iraqi soldiers killed to be around 15-20 thousand. If you combine all the combatant deaths with non combatant deaths and use the 49.39% survey for female population of Iraq and apply it to casualties (generous considering a percentage of male population would be serving in the military and thus the number skews in favor of men) as I can find no direct source for female death totals- that would STILL make it safer to be serving in ANY military combat role in the country than to have the “privilege” of being a non combatant woman.
Tl:dr- the argument and logic are flawed and I wouldn’t want to debate this guy either as he can’t apply logic and most of the time would be spent trying to teach him comprehension. You can’t claim men are victims and women are not victims in situations where men are also the victimizes, and especially so when women also victimized by these actions. War is a terrible example as women often aren’t allowed to fight BY MEN, and war tends to make victims of civilians as well who do not have weapons, fire support, training, or any of the tools to survive combat soldiers do but are often present in the combat zone.
Now the other statistics- work place fatalities is a bit open to discuss. Keeping in mind that women were and still to an extent often are obstructed or barred from many dangerous jobs- we would also need to eliminate “at fault” accidents as being unsafe or making a mistake doesn’t correlate to privilege by itself. We would then need to adjust the percentage by field. For instance- if 90% of deep sea welders were men and 10% women- so that let’s say 9 males died and one female- while by total percent female deaths are lower, by demographic the deaths are proportional to the number of workers and the overall fatality rate is the same male or female.
Important information like this is missing from those generic, and somewhat random and unrelated numbers. We cant just pick a bunch of bad stuff that a group of people deal with and say “see? This proves/disproves there’s a bias!” The statistic can be used to prove privilege but doesn’t itself prove privilege. WHY the statistic looks that way is important. WHY do more men work in jobs that are potentially deadly? Why aren’t they becoming secretaries or house cleaners or other non hazardous jobs?
Is it because they do not have the opportunity or didn’t have the same access to education, employment, training, etc? Or is it because higher risk jobs tend to pay more for equivalent levels of education or skill base for untrained, unskilled, uneducated workers; and that men might tend to have a higher risk tolerance than a woman who might decide that the extra money for risking their life isn’t worth the danger? I’m not saying that’s the case- I’m saying that before you make an argument for “female privilege” in these fields- we must first establish there is some privilege at work.
For instance- if we surveyed say... a group of miners or steel workers or crab fishers or fire fighters- all dangerous and traditionally mostly male professions- and we said “we will give you a free 6 month training program to do IT networking... or a free coder boot camp, accounting classes, sales training, etc-“ how many would take it? Do they WANT to do another job and what is stopping them from doing it that isn’t stopping women?
So there are important questions there. Suicide is another hot button one. It’s been shown in data many times that the overall RISK of suicide and rates of attempt aren’t so far apart between men and women. Men tend to be more successful at it because of the methods that tend to be favored by men and women respectively. Is that a “privilege?” That women tend to choose ineffective suicide methods? What is stopping a man from taking a bunch of sleeping pills in a shared home where he’s likely to be found? What resources are available for women that are not for men to help prevent suicide?
Is it privilege that women are more likely to seek a therapist and stick to a regime of medication? Now- certain elements like “asking for help” are put in an unfavorable light in “traditional” ideas of masculinity. This can sometimes stop men from seeking help because they were indoctrinated to not “show vulnerability.” So please note I’m not belittling males and suicide- we do need to help change gender roles so that men know they can get help and can express their emotions.
However- we can’t exclusively lay this down as “female privilege.” Especially when we take into account that many so called “privileges” of being female in society are counterbalances or the direct result of oppression of women historically. So yes- men face problems- but there is no reason to blame these problems on women where women are not the cause, and there’s certainly no reason to try and belittle the problems of others simply because we have our own problems. Better even still is if we an empathize and say: “hey- maybe we can help each other solve our problems together...”
This comes off as the whining of a person who isn’t actually interested in seeing change happen. Who would try and use the existence of these issues facing men to justify marginalizing or dismissing the valid issues of others- but if faced with personal choice to make changes to abolish unhealthy underlying social norms and thought processes behind these issues and adopt healthy and modern norms for males in society, would scoff at the idea that in order to get a different result you actually have to make changes.
I am very bitter right now so sorry if I sound agressive.